F-35 Cancelled, then what ?
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 495
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
kbrockman I'm not saying they will buy this year..after a poor start it took 10 years for the f-16 after IOC and yes Poland and Spain could be buyers too
Norway went a year earlier than planned for their package buy of LRIPs ..funny that even in LRIP it seems cheaper than the typhoon package sale to Oman
Norway went a year earlier than planned for their package buy of LRIPs ..funny that even in LRIP it seems cheaper than the typhoon package sale to Oman
A serious question with an open hand. JSFfan, what is your reason for your obvious fanaticism for this jet.? The rest of us are quite open about who we are, where we stand and why.
Who are you?
Why your fanatical devotion to the F-35?
Who are you?
Why your fanatical devotion to the F-35?
If so, soon to be fired for hardening everyone else's position against the wonder jet.
So, JSFfan, this has gone on long enough.
Who are you?
Why your fanatical devotion to the F-35?
So, JSFfan, this has gone on long enough.
Who are you?
Why your fanatical devotion to the F-35?
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,577
Likes: 0
Received 52 Likes
on
45 Posts
'LowObservable' has left out the potential Singaporean buy of perhaps 12? F-35Bs?
In Focus: Singapore steps up deterrent capabilities Greg Waldron, Flight International, February 1, 2012
IN FOCUS: Singapore steps up deterrent capabilities
"...Sources say Singapore could also be interested in the F-35B, the type's short take-off and vertical landing variant...."
Is Not Enough: Reflections on China’s Military Trajectory and the U.S. Pivot 25 Nov 2012
Richard D. Fisher, Jr. | Senior Fellow, International Assessment and Strategy Center
http://www.strategycenter.net/docLib...ough112512.pdf
"...For Singapore, widely expected to buy the F-35 and Taiwan, which has also signaled its interest, the F-35B offers 5th generation performance plus tactical concealment advantages, as it could also be employed from the protective cover of U.S. naval formations with carriers or LHD size ships...."
Singapore looks to ties that bind 06 Apr 2013 SEAH CHIANG NEE
Singapore looks to ties that bind - Opinion | The Star Online
F-35 office sees improved relations with contractor 26 Apr 2013 Aaron Mehta
http://www.airforcetimes.com/article/20130426/NEWS/304260013 (page 3)
"...Adding partners can help bring down costs, and both Singapore and South Korea have shown interest in purchasing the plane, which could lead to a boost in orders that will force down unit costs in the future. Singapore has shown "tremendous interest" in the JSF, according to Bogdan. "They are quite enthused about the airplane. I believe by this summer we will hear" if they will be purchasing. Similarly, South Korea should have a decision for their fighter replacement program by June , and said he is "cautiously optimistic" the country will pick the F-35...."
_______________
Have searched for Sea Gripen here, not sure if this undated detailed info has been posted earlier (unsurprisingly these details were news to me but so are a lot of things).
SEA GRIPEN: FORCE MULTIPLIER FOR THE INDIAN NAVY (IN) Apr? 2013?
Tony Ogilvy MBE AFC, General Manager, Aeronautics Head of Sea Gripen Design Centre, Saab UK
Sea Gripen: Force Multiplier For The Indian Navy (IN)
“...The design phase was completed in August 2012, and with a customer in support of this programme the next step will be the production of test vehicle(s) for proof of concept and deck launch & recovery work.
With a catapult launch Sea Gripen will be able to operate to its maximum takeoff weight of 16.5 tonnes, which will provide navies with Gripen EF performance and capability from a carrier base. Without catapult assist-ance, we are working on further methods to increase takeoff payload. Saab anticipates that Sea Gripen will offer a very capable payload performance from a 200 metre deck run, and 14 degree ramp exit. [Bit of CVF metal bashing should put things right with some AAG (Advanced Arrestor Gear).]
The Sea Gripen is an ideal replacement for existing fleets, countries which will return to carrier based operations, and potential emerging aircraft carrier nations. Its footprint will allow it to operate from all existing carriers in service, and fit on every lift in operation worldwide.
Sea Gripen is the new-generation carrier-based fighter option for the future. With all the capabilities of the Gripen EF, it will be the most technologically advanced fighter aircraft in the world for embarked operations.”
In Focus: Singapore steps up deterrent capabilities Greg Waldron, Flight International, February 1, 2012
IN FOCUS: Singapore steps up deterrent capabilities
"...Sources say Singapore could also be interested in the F-35B, the type's short take-off and vertical landing variant...."
Is Not Enough: Reflections on China’s Military Trajectory and the U.S. Pivot 25 Nov 2012
Richard D. Fisher, Jr. | Senior Fellow, International Assessment and Strategy Center
http://www.strategycenter.net/docLib...ough112512.pdf
"...For Singapore, widely expected to buy the F-35 and Taiwan, which has also signaled its interest, the F-35B offers 5th generation performance plus tactical concealment advantages, as it could also be employed from the protective cover of U.S. naval formations with carriers or LHD size ships...."
Singapore looks to ties that bind 06 Apr 2013 SEAH CHIANG NEE
Singapore looks to ties that bind - Opinion | The Star Online
F-35 office sees improved relations with contractor 26 Apr 2013 Aaron Mehta
http://www.airforcetimes.com/article/20130426/NEWS/304260013 (page 3)
"...Adding partners can help bring down costs, and both Singapore and South Korea have shown interest in purchasing the plane, which could lead to a boost in orders that will force down unit costs in the future. Singapore has shown "tremendous interest" in the JSF, according to Bogdan. "They are quite enthused about the airplane. I believe by this summer we will hear" if they will be purchasing. Similarly, South Korea should have a decision for their fighter replacement program by June , and said he is "cautiously optimistic" the country will pick the F-35...."
_______________
Have searched for Sea Gripen here, not sure if this undated detailed info has been posted earlier (unsurprisingly these details were news to me but so are a lot of things).
SEA GRIPEN: FORCE MULTIPLIER FOR THE INDIAN NAVY (IN) Apr? 2013?
Tony Ogilvy MBE AFC, General Manager, Aeronautics Head of Sea Gripen Design Centre, Saab UK
Sea Gripen: Force Multiplier For The Indian Navy (IN)
“...The design phase was completed in August 2012, and with a customer in support of this programme the next step will be the production of test vehicle(s) for proof of concept and deck launch & recovery work.
With a catapult launch Sea Gripen will be able to operate to its maximum takeoff weight of 16.5 tonnes, which will provide navies with Gripen EF performance and capability from a carrier base. Without catapult assist-ance, we are working on further methods to increase takeoff payload. Saab anticipates that Sea Gripen will offer a very capable payload performance from a 200 metre deck run, and 14 degree ramp exit. [Bit of CVF metal bashing should put things right with some AAG (Advanced Arrestor Gear).]
The Sea Gripen is an ideal replacement for existing fleets, countries which will return to carrier based operations, and potential emerging aircraft carrier nations. Its footprint will allow it to operate from all existing carriers in service, and fit on every lift in operation worldwide.
Sea Gripen is the new-generation carrier-based fighter option for the future. With all the capabilities of the Gripen EF, it will be the most technologically advanced fighter aircraft in the world for embarked operations.”
The notion that Spain and/or Greece might spend $bns on a 5th-gen stealth fighter, with no prospect of significant workshare, is utterly implausible given the state of both nations' finances now and for the foreseeable future. Even the vague 'threat' from the Turks against the Greeks gets nowhere near pushing it high enough up their national spending priority list. Plus, if I was German, I would be mightily annoyed that countries surviving on piles of my hard-earned cash were spending it on highly-advanced, predominantly US-built military equipment! It simply won't happen.
Easy Street, absolutely. Countries that don't even know how they're going to pay their own employees next month, let alone fund the most expensive aircraft so far. Ain't going to happen. I doubt the Euro Zone deal for their bail-outs will include the phrase, "go ahead with your new mega defence purchase, we'll help you fund it if you run out of the money we give you."
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Middle America
Age: 84
Posts: 1,167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JSFfan
Whether the story is 2 months old, 2 weeks old or 2 days old is irrelevant, you missed the point completely. Perhaps you are unaware of the political atmosphere here in the US, being soooo far away, down under. You concentrate on the technical upside of the F-35 program, ignoring the political side that is fraught with potential showstoppers. Presently, the US Congress is on recess and they have yet to take up the budget of the US government going forward. Believe it or not, the F-35 is going to be part of this process and there isn't much good program news to believe it will float through the process untouched, no matter what you think. You saw what happened to the F-22 program and realism would indicate a reduction in spending for the F-35 program at a minimum.
Comparisons of the F-35 program to the F-16 program of yesteryear is fruitless from an acquisition cost point of view (everyone understands the F-35 is very much more expensive program) or whether the F-16 program had a tough sled (it did) for foreign countries to buy into the program. Perhaps you are not well acquainted with the layout of the Pentagon. On one floor there was a group that promotes sales overseas. On another floor there was a group that discourages sales overseas to protect advanced technology, paid for by American taxpayers. For sometime, the discouraging group ruled the roost and delays of sales resulted. I visited there and saw how it worked. It will be no different this time around for the F-35 when it comes to technology exportation.
So you stick to publishing the Lockheed promo material and from time to time I will bring the realism into the conversation apart from the technical virtues of the F-35 Lightning, whatever they might be, or not...
TD
you should use your computer more, that story is 2 mths old
Comparisons of the F-35 program to the F-16 program of yesteryear is fruitless from an acquisition cost point of view (everyone understands the F-35 is very much more expensive program) or whether the F-16 program had a tough sled (it did) for foreign countries to buy into the program. Perhaps you are not well acquainted with the layout of the Pentagon. On one floor there was a group that promotes sales overseas. On another floor there was a group that discourages sales overseas to protect advanced technology, paid for by American taxpayers. For sometime, the discouraging group ruled the roost and delays of sales resulted. I visited there and saw how it worked. It will be no different this time around for the F-35 when it comes to technology exportation.
So you stick to publishing the Lockheed promo material and from time to time I will bring the realism into the conversation apart from the technical virtues of the F-35 Lightning, whatever they might be, or not...
TD
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Leicestershire, England
Posts: 1,170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Standby for Tubine D's post to be completely ignored by JSFfan, and more endless bilge on how utterly splendid the entire F-35 program is, always has been and always will be, right up until its ****canned! 
-RP
-RP
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Oz
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...10.65 billion$ in 2013 value means close to 205 million per copy.
I note how quick all the doomsayers have been to denounce silly statements by JSFfan and others (regardless of merit), but no one (like LO who I KNOW knows better) has bothered to counter this ridiculous comment.
I guess it's only wrong if it doesn't fit in to your view of the world...
Last edited by FoxtrotAlpha18; 28th Apr 2013 at 06:50.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 495
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LO, who knows what the total number will be and we can speculate all day..I'm more concerned with when is block 3 and how many per year in the ramp up from 2015 till 2020..it's how many a year that counts for the price partners pay
CM, nothing has changed no matter how many times it is asked, as I have said before, I'm still only a pleb with the same public access most have. ..I just don't subscribe to the fantasy that the f-35 will be canceled and there will be a rush for eurocanard or boeing orders
Turbine, I don't know how many times they need to say there are 3 procurement priorities..the f-35, subs and a long range bomber..the annual hat in hand to the congress for their budget is par for the course
fox...I'm always happy to be shown as wrong and when I make a mistake I freely admit it
no one challenges things against the f-35 very often..if they look into it..norway has said their first 6 are dear because of lrip all the other stuff they need spread over only a few frames..
Korea will pay more because of FMS fees and they have been quoted $180m in a package deal
for reference the gripen and super hornet package are about $150m ea and the Omar typhoon package seems to be well over $200m and already dearer than the f-35
CM, nothing has changed no matter how many times it is asked, as I have said before, I'm still only a pleb with the same public access most have. ..I just don't subscribe to the fantasy that the f-35 will be canceled and there will be a rush for eurocanard or boeing orders
Turbine, I don't know how many times they need to say there are 3 procurement priorities..the f-35, subs and a long range bomber..the annual hat in hand to the congress for their budget is par for the course
fox...I'm always happy to be shown as wrong and when I make a mistake I freely admit it
no one challenges things against the f-35 very often..if they look into it..norway has said their first 6 are dear because of lrip all the other stuff they need spread over only a few frames..
Korea will pay more because of FMS fees and they have been quoted $180m in a package deal
for reference the gripen and super hornet package are about $150m ea and the Omar typhoon package seems to be well over $200m and already dearer than the f-35
Last edited by JSFfan; 28th Apr 2013 at 06:22.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Earth
Posts: 125
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by FoxtrotAlpha18
Based on that logic, lets work out a per unit cost of a Eurofighter, or a Rafale as well then...
According to French Senate and UK's NAO, the Rafale's unit cost in France is about $200m, while the EF costs UK about $170m per unit, both figures including R&D (PAUC).
Granted, UK's cost is not the whole Eurofighter bill since Germany, Italy and Spain are sharing R&D expenses, but that's what partnerships are for and something JSF partners like Norway are supposed to be exempt from, which suggests the JSF is even costlier.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Melbourne
Age: 57
Posts: 628
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In order to try and get the conversation back to its interesting former self here's something for your consideration.
Game Changer: The F-35 and the Pacific | The Diplomat
Given "The Diplomat" focusses on Asia and that's where the next large hotspots of contention (as opposed to walkovers) are likely to be I have often found them to be a very well researched with well considered opinion pieces.
Others may disagree.
Game Changer: The F-35 and the Pacific | The Diplomat
Given "The Diplomat" focusses on Asia and that's where the next large hotspots of contention (as opposed to walkovers) are likely to be I have often found them to be a very well researched with well considered opinion pieces.
Others may disagree.